'found vs. not found' or 'when not to do a favor'

[+sbell111]

OK, I need your advice.

 

I was planning a geocaching outing a few days ago. I was reading the recent logs for caches that I have not yet found. I came across a post from an acquaintance on one of the cache pages. The text basically said that all he found was an empty hole. It was logged as a find.

 

I assumed that he had logged it as a find in error since (until recently) 'found it' was the default when logging a note to the cache page. I can't say that this individual is a friend of mine, but I have had a few friendly conversations with him in the past so I sent him a friendly email asking him if he intended to log it as a find.

 

I received a response that advised that he did intend to log as a find and inquiring as to why I wanted to know.

 

I assumed that my first email was not worded appropriately so I sent a carefully worded email that explained that I was just trying to do him a favor if he had logged it in error so it didn't fall off his unfound list.

 

Sadly, I received a response. This is the text, "are you the geo police /// or just like messing in other people bussiness".

 

I have two questions that I need your input on.

 

First, was I wrong to contact an acquaintance about a possible mistake they made logging a cache that I did not place?

 

Second, how do you feel about logging unfounds as 'finds'. Personally, I am not in direct competition with anyone (except you Shimbabwe! ha ha) so it doesn't affect me when someone 'falsifies' a find. That being said, when a person makes a big deal about his find count and then makes this type of log, it bugs me.

 

How do you feel?

[+ApK]

How I feel:

It's a courtesy to the cache owner and watchers , who are watching possible for items' movement or to keep up on maintenence needs, to log a find only if found. It's a discourtesy to do otherwise. It's particularly discourteous, I think, to leave found log and then bother to write the fact that you DIDN'T find it.

If I was feeling petty, my response would be "I was just curious if you INTENDED to advertise yourself as an inconsiderate jerk?"

But I'd probably think better of it and not reply to the inconsiderate jerk at all. I'm working on suffering fools. (That's why I'm not responding to the "SA is on and it's a military secret that only I know" thread.

...oh...I guess I need more practice...

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by sbell111:

OK, I need your advice.

 

I was planning a geocaching outing a few days ago. I was reading the recent logs for caches that I have not yet found. I came across a post from an acquaintance on one of the cache pages. The text basically said that all he found was an empty hole. It was logged as a find.

 

I assumed that he had logged it as a find in error since (until recently) 'found it' was the default when logging a note to the cache page. I can't say that this individual is a friend of mine, but I have had a few friendly conversations with him in the past so I sent him a friendly email asking him if he intended to log it as a find.

 

I received a response that advised that he did intend to log as a find and inquiring as to why I wanted to know.

 

I assumed that my first email was not worded appropriately so I sent a carefully worded email that explained that I was just trying to do him a favor if he had logged it in error so it didn't fall off his unfound list.

 

Sadly, I received a response. This is the text, "are you the geo police /// or just like messing in other people bussiness".

 

I have two questions that I need your input on.

 

First, was I wrong to contact an acquaintance about a possible mistake they made logging a cache that I did not place?

 

Second, how do you feel about logging unfounds as 'finds'. Personally, I am not in direct competition with anyone (except you Shimbabwe! ha ha) so it doesn't affect me when someone 'falsifies' a find. That being said, when a person makes a big deal about his find count and then makes this type of log, it bugs me.

 

How do you feel?

---

[+ApK]

How I feel:

It's a courtesy to the cache owner and watchers , who are watching possible for items' movement or to keep up on maintenence needs, to log a find only if found. It's a discourtesy to do otherwise. It's particularly discourteous, I think, to leave found log and then bother to write the fact that you DIDN'T find it.

If I was feeling petty, my response would be "I was just curious if you INTENDED to advertise yourself as an inconsiderate jerk?"

But I'd probably think better of it and not reply to the inconsiderate jerk at all. I'm working on suffering fools. (That's why I'm not responding to the "SA is on and it's a military secret that only I know" thread.

...oh...I guess I need more practice...

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by sbell111:

OK, I need your advice.

 

I was planning a geocaching outing a few days ago. I was reading the recent logs for caches that I have not yet found. I came across a post from an acquaintance on one of the cache pages. The text basically said that all he found was an empty hole. It was logged as a find.

 

I assumed that he had logged it as a find in error since (until recently) 'found it' was the default when logging a note to the cache page. I can't say that this individual is a friend of mine, but I have had a few friendly conversations with him in the past so I sent him a friendly email asking him if he intended to log it as a find.

 

I received a response that advised that he did intend to log as a find and inquiring as to why I wanted to know.

 

I assumed that my first email was not worded appropriately so I sent a carefully worded email that explained that I was just trying to do him a favor if he had logged it in error so it didn't fall off his unfound list.

 

Sadly, I received a response. This is the text, "are you the geo police /// or just like messing in other people bussiness".

 

I have two questions that I need your input on.

 

First, was I wrong to contact an acquaintance about a possible mistake they made logging a cache that I did not place?

 

Second, how do you feel about logging unfounds as 'finds'. Personally, I am not in direct competition with anyone (except you Shimbabwe! ha ha) so it doesn't affect me when someone 'falsifies' a find. That being said, when a person makes a big deal about his find count and then makes this type of log, it bugs me.

 

How do you feel?

---

[King Pellinore]

It sounds like your intention was not off-base, but it is completely possible that the other party misunderstood. Also, not having read any of the exchange except what you have chosen to post here, any comments are going to be 'colored' to reflect that. Bearing that in mind, I will continue. It is also entirely possible that his reaction is a sort of admission of guilt. If he did nothing wrong, why does he need to be so defensive? I don't think you were wrong in pointing it out, but then again is it really your business or concern? Again, we have no idea what this other fellow's side of the story is. Has that cache been found since he looked for it, or was it really missing?

 

King Pellinore

[+Jamie Z]

Sbell,

 

I've sent such a message on two occasions. Neither person responded directly, but I did notice one person deleted their log.

 

When I contact them, I have to say that I did feel a bit like the geocaching police, so I tried to word my emails very carefully. Hopefully I didn't irritate either person.

 

I must admit that logging no-finds as finds is a bit of a pet-peeve of mine, which was part of my reason for sending my mail, but the other reason (and the reason I mentioned in my email) was pointed out by ApK. Logging a find when the cache may not be there is a disservice to the cache owner and future hunters. If the cache is missing, a no-find should be logged to alert those interested persons of the situation.

 

I don't think you did anything wrong, but I can see where a person could be annoyed by receiving such an email. I might respond to that person and point out that logging a find gives an incorrect impression of the status of that cache.

 

Jamie

[BassoonPilot]

Contact the owner of the cache and politely suggest that s/he review the logs and delete any that appear to be in error, false, or fraudulent . . . after having established communication with the individual who posted the questionable log, of course. In such matters, the cache owner is the "GeoPolice."

[+Brokenwing]

Since you thought that it might have been logged in error, pointing this out just seems like common courtesy to me. As I see it, this was not you “trying to be the geo-police”, simply you trying to help a fellow cacher.

 

The problem comes in from the way this person seems to have interpreted your emails. While your intent may have been good, he obviously interpreted things differently. This could have simply been a misunderstanding based on your wording. Alternately, he may have taken offense because he felt guilty. (After all, lashing out at the accuser is a classic guilt response when someone is caught cheating.)

 

I will say that I don’t think any of us should concern ourselves with others found logs. In your case, you wanted to help and that’s fine. If, however someone was intentionally sending emails to people that they thought were cheating, that’s a different story altogether and is not really appropriate behavior in my book.

 

As a cache owner, I have every right to change or delete incorrect posts such as this one. As a disinterested third-party, I have no such right.

 

Since there is another current thread about your second question, I won’t go into detail on that point. I’ll just say that I don’t bother much with others find counts and don’t consider this a competition at all. I’d much rather concern myself with which cache I’m going to do next, not which caches someone else did or didn’t do.

 

If you still want to try to smooth things out with that other cacher, you might try something like this:

 

“I’m sincerely sorry that my previous emails seem to have struck a nerve. That was not my intent. I had seen your find log, and a statement in the log that you did not find the cache, so I was understandably confused. I had thought you must have logged it this way in error and I thought I was doing you a favor by letting you know about this. I see now that you did indeed mean to log this way and my concern was unfounded. If you wish to log unfound caches as found, that is your prerogative. I am certainly not the “geo-police”, but just someone that thought they could help.

 

Again, I’m sorry for the misunderstanding.”

 

Best of luck.

 

Scott / Brokenwing

http://www.cordianet.com/geocaching

[+Renegade Knight]

In the short time I've been with this community I've learned that a lot of geocaching is honor based. Our finds, out logs, our ...ahem...skunks. In this type of world, people need to watch each other. You may have annoyed the guy, and if he tells you to buzz off, that's his right. Still you have to stand up for what you think is right. Get out of the habit and societies moral compass starts to drift. Which it has because people tolerate more and more deviations from what used to be considered 'right'. Yeah I'm taking this to an extreme. But that's my point. You said something where others would be silent.

[+ApK]

Bravo, Sir Knight!

 

As my sensei says "There are three kinds of people in the world: Weasels, Lambs and Weasel-Slappers."

Be a Weasel-Slapper!

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Renegade Knight:

In the short time I've been with this community I've learned that a lot of geocaching is honor based. Our finds, out logs, our ...ahem...skunks. In this type of world, people need to watch each other. You may have annoyed the guy, and if he tells you to buzz off, that's his right. Still you have to stand up for what you think is right. Get out of the habit and societies moral compass starts to drift. Which it has because people tolerate more and more deviations from what used to be considered 'right'. Yeah I'm taking this to an extreme. But that's my point. You said something where others would be silent.

---

[+markj]

OK, I'll weigh in on this one... I recently traveled to Oregon on business and took an extra half-day off to try to bag some caches. One -- the Carto-Cache -- I found to have been obviously stolen/plundered. A piece of the cache container with the cache name and owner was left on the ground amongst some trash at the trailhead, but I pressed on, thinking there might be an explanation. I followed the directions (decided to cheat since I was short on time) and walked right to the perfectly round hole in the ground where the cache was supposed to have been. I notified the cache owners, they checked and confirmed that it had disappeared.

 

So, to the point... I logged the cache as a "Found" for this reason: I went to considerable trouble to get to the cache, and had some a****** not made off with it, would have had a "legitimate" Found. Now, having read the previous posts, I've seen a little different perspective... If anyone is offended, or thinks this was improperly logged as a Found, then I'll gladly amend it. My log (IMHO) was pretty clear that this cache was no longer there, and in fact, the owners had deactivated it almost immediately. If this had happened in my area, I might have logged it as a Not Found, since I could reasonably expect to go back to it when it was restored. I couldn't necessarily do that with Carto-Cache.

 

So, the point about "what's the point anyway?" (i.e., just to bump one's count, or what) is a good one. I have not logged a Not Found yet. Came close twice, but with the two chips always tagging along, was able to finally bag every one we set out after. I guess the count thing isn't that important, but gee whiz, I just hate to lose.

 

Should this be a Found or Not Found??

[+markj]

OK, I'll weigh in on this one... I recently traveled to Oregon on business and took an extra half-day off to try to bag some caches. One -- the Carto-Cache -- I found to have been obviously stolen/plundered. A piece of the cache container with the cache name and owner was left on the ground amongst some trash at the trailhead, but I pressed on, thinking there might be an explanation. I followed the directions (decided to cheat since I was short on time) and walked right to the perfectly round hole in the ground where the cache was supposed to have been. I notified the cache owners, they checked and confirmed that it had disappeared.

 

So, to the point... I logged the cache as a "Found" for this reason: I went to considerable trouble to get to the cache, and had some a****** not made off with it, would have had a "legitimate" Found. Now, having read the previous posts, I've seen a little different perspective... If anyone is offended, or thinks this was improperly logged as a Found, then I'll gladly amend it. My log (IMHO) was pretty clear that this cache was no longer there, and in fact, the owners had deactivated it almost immediately. If this had happened in my area, I might have logged it as a Not Found, since I could reasonably expect to go back to it when it was restored. I couldn't necessarily do that with Carto-Cache.

 

So, the point about "what's the point anyway?" (i.e., just to bump one's count, or what) is a good one. I have not logged a Not Found yet. Came close twice, but with the two chips always tagging along, was able to finally bag every one we set out after. I guess the count thing isn't that important, but gee whiz, I just hate to lose.

 

Should this be a Found or Not Found??

[irvingdog]

Perhaps when posting to a cache, it should not default to found or not found so that one has to make a conscience decision as to when catagory they fall under? Just a thought......

 

[+Salvelinus]

I currently have a similar situation occuring. I carefully responded to the person last night. I haven't heard from him yet, but I hope he gets the hint. I'll let you know.

 

If it turns out like yours, I'll likely let it rest and leave it up to the cache placer to handle it. "No sense getting into a pi__ing contest with a skunk"

[+VentureForth]

I found a cache the other day which wasn't up to what most of us would deem "geocaching.com standards". I noticed that the guy only had about two finds, so I emailed him and he said that he was very appreciative of my feedback. According to the logs, he hasn't changed anything yet, but he's appreciative of my feedback.

 

Go! And don't be afraid to get a little wet!

[+VentureForth]

I found a cache the other day which wasn't up to what most of us would deem "geocaching.com standards". I noticed that the guy only had about two finds, so I emailed him and he said that he was very appreciative of my feedback. According to the logs, he hasn't changed anything yet, but he's appreciative of my feedback.

 

Go! And don't be afraid to get a little wet!

[Moun10Bike]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markj:

 

Should this be a Found or Not Found??

---

 

In my opinion, that's a "Not Found." In addition, I think that it is important to log it that way for the rest of the geocaching community, as "Not Found" logs can act as a barometer of cache health.

 

To illustrate, imagine that someone is looking for a cache to hunt and stumbles across that one before the owner has archived/disabled it. He wants to maintain the surprise of the hunt, so he chooses to avoid reading the logs. Instead, he gives a quick glance through the log entries and sees not frowny faces, only smilies. He then heads off unaware that the cache has been plundered.

 

In many cases, the logs are meaningful to more than just the person who posts them.

 

[Moun10Bike]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markj:

 

Should this be a Found or Not Found??

---

 

In my opinion, that's a "Not Found." In addition, I think that it is important to log it that way for the rest of the geocaching community, as "Not Found" logs can act as a barometer of cache health.

 

To illustrate, imagine that someone is looking for a cache to hunt and stumbles across that one before the owner has archived/disabled it. He wants to maintain the surprise of the hunt, so he chooses to avoid reading the logs. Instead, he gives a quick glance through the log entries and sees not frowny faces, only smilies. He then heads off unaware that the cache has been plundered.

 

In many cases, the logs are meaningful to more than just the person who posts them.

 

[Moun10Bike]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Irvingdog:

 

Perhaps when posting to a cache, it should not default to found or not found so that one has to make a conscience decision as to when catagory they fall under? Just a thought......

---

 

Jeremy recently made this change. Now when posting, you have to pick from one of three radio buttons, none of which is preselected.

 

[Zuckerruebensirup]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markj:

 

Should this be a Found or Not Found??

---

 

I'd say that's a "Found". You said yourself that you found part of the cache container. And if you are certain you found the location that it was originally hidden in, I'd say it was a legitimate find.

 

As for later cachers who happen upon the cache page before the owner can disable it, but who choose not to read so they don't spoil their own hunt, I'd say that's similar luck of the draw as the cacher who happens to follow the plunderer, and gets disappointed to learn the cache is missing.

[Moun10Bike]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zuckerruebensirup:

 

I'd say that's a "Found". You said yourself that you found part of the cache container. And if you are certain you found the location that it was originally hidden in, I'd say it was a legitimate find.

---

 

Except that he found it in some trash at the trailhead, not at the cache site. My own opinion is that unless you find the cache in the spot in which the hider intended you to find it, it is not truly a "find."

 

As for being certain that one has found the location that it was originally hidden in, I think back to another incident mentioned in these forums. Someone had been sure that they had found the right spot for a cache, but no container. They assumed the cache had been stolen, so they left a new ziplock back with their trade item in it in that spot. They were unaware that the cache was just a few feet away, hidden right where the owner had placed it to begin with.

 

The bottom line, in my book, is that unless you find the cache intact in the spot in which the hider intended it to be found, you can't legitimately log it as "Found."

 

quote:

---

As for later cachers who happen upon the cache page before the owner can disable it, but who choose not to read so they don't spoil their own hunt, I'd say that's similar luck of the draw as the cacher who happens to follow the plunderer, and gets disappointed to learn the cache is missing.

---

 

I disagree. The smiley face here provides positive information; i.e. "the cache is here and OK." This information directly conflicts with the actual state of the cache, and thus should not be used. It is actually actively misleading others.

 

Of course, this is all just my opinion. As the number of threads concerning this issue would indicate, there are a lot of differing ones out there!

 

[Moun10Bike]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zuckerruebensirup:

 

I'd say that's a "Found". You said yourself that you found part of the cache container. And if you are certain you found the location that it was originally hidden in, I'd say it was a legitimate find.

---

 

Except that he found it in some trash at the trailhead, not at the cache site. My own opinion is that unless you find the cache in the spot in which the hider intended you to find it, it is not truly a "find."

 

As for being certain that one has found the location that it was originally hidden in, I think back to another incident mentioned in these forums. Someone had been sure that they had found the right spot for a cache, but no container. They assumed the cache had been stolen, so they left a new ziplock back with their trade item in it in that spot. They were unaware that the cache was just a few feet away, hidden right where the owner had placed it to begin with.

 

The bottom line, in my book, is that unless you find the cache intact in the spot in which the hider intended it to be found, you can't legitimately log it as "Found."

 

quote:

---

As for later cachers who happen upon the cache page before the owner can disable it, but who choose not to read so they don't spoil their own hunt, I'd say that's similar luck of the draw as the cacher who happens to follow the plunderer, and gets disappointed to learn the cache is missing.

---

 

I disagree. The smiley face here provides positive information; i.e. "the cache is here and OK." This information directly conflicts with the actual state of the cache, and thus should not be used. It is actually actively misleading others.

 

Of course, this is all just my opinion. As the number of threads concerning this issue would indicate, there are a lot of differing ones out there!

 

[+Jamie Z]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markj:

Should this be a Found or Not Found??

---

 

MarkJ,

 

Not found... in my opinion. Mostly I agree with Moun10Bike. Of course, this one really could go either way. What if you had found the entire cache container at the trailhead and it hadn't been plundered? That would be a find, in my mind.

 

I think what makes me think this should be a not-found is that you weren't able to sign the logbook. A not-found on the cache page indicates that you encountered some trouble (of some sort) during your search, which in this case, you did.

 

In any case, I see how this could go either way... and also, it's good to see another local guy on the forums. Welcome!

 

Jamie

[cachebaby]

Place a 'virtual/webcam' cache - requirement was a photo of the cacher at the cache site be uploaded with log. The gentleman logged a find but no photo. I waited two days & then sent an email...said I'd have to delete the find if a .jpeg wasn't uploaded. And then a second email, deadline included.

 

Checked the log page on deadline day, and he had uploaded a photo... but it turned out to be a link to the on-line webcam...not his photo from the date of his find.

 

So I deleted it. Got a subsequent email from him... gave an explanation (problem with friend helping to save the photo). He said if I had to delete it "so be it".

 

At least he was nice about it.

 

------------------------

I'm new here, be gentle.

[+ApK]

I compete in geocaching with no one but myself, but I DO like my find/no find count to be accurate.

Do you think it would be appropriate for keknj and me to change our no find logs to notes onTHIS CACHE PAGE?

[+Jamie Z]

ApK,

 

Seems like a no-find to me... you looked, you didn't find.

 

Jamie

[+sbell111]

The argument could be made that you found that cache. I think that since the cache has been archived, your free to change your entry from not-found to found if the hider agrees.

 

In the past, I have found caches plundered and scattered about at the hide site. I put it back together, rehid it, and logged as a find and explained the circumstances.

 

This is different than finding the hide location barren or finding the cache remains in the trash at the trailhead. These instances, in my mind, should be 'no finds'.

[+markj]

Hmmm... Good discussion. I'm thinking now that in the interest of GC purity, I'll go back and log Carto-Cache as a Not Found Cachebaby gives me a great idea, though... I've got a digital camera... Perhaps I'll take it with me on all cache hunts from now on and if I run into this problem again, I'll post a picture of where the cache should have been (or at least where I think it should have been). If the cache owner agrees based on the picture that I found the location but that the cache has been stolen/plundered, then I think that should qualify as a Found.

 

What do y'all think about that??

[+markj]

Hmmm... Good discussion. I'm thinking now that in the interest of GC purity, I'll go back and log Carto-Cache as a Not Found Cachebaby gives me a great idea, though... I've got a digital camera... Perhaps I'll take it with me on all cache hunts from now on and if I run into this problem again, I'll post a picture of where the cache should have been (or at least where I think it should have been). If the cache owner agrees based on the picture that I found the location but that the cache has been stolen/plundered, then I think that should qualify as a Found.

 

What do y'all think about that??

[mortonfox]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ApK:

Do you think it would be appropriate for keknj and me to change our no find logs to notes onhttp://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.asp?ID=9084

---

 

I too have been to a cache site where a fire had taken place and logged it as a Not Found. No biggie. Just moved on to the next cache.

[+Faithwalker & DaMama]

Markj

"If the cache owner agrees based on the picture that I found the location but that the cache has been stolen/plundered, then I think that should qualify as a Found"

 

I disagree, if you find nothing you should log nothing. If the owner decides to change the cache to a virtual than you could log it. The find/no find stat icon is there for a reason, cache owners and finders should use that as an indication of the cache health. If anyone posts a find at a site than the next seeker should expect the same. If we start logging all the places caches were than there's no need for a not found icon. Every hunt could result in a find. Personally I'm not troubled by not found logs, I find that it's much more annoying when you post a not found and than e-mail the owner and they don't do anything about it or don't even reply. Of course that's only my opinion which has been known to change from time to time.

 

...Cache Responsible & may all your birds be in view...

...Faithwalker & DaMama...

[Zuckerruebensirup]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Moun10Bike:

As for being certain that one has found the location that it was originally hidden in, I think back to another incident mentioned in these forums. Someone had been sure that they had found the right spot for a cache, but no container. They assumed the cache had been stolen, so they left a new ziplock back with their trade item in it in that spot. They were unaware that the cache was just a few feet away, hidden right where the owner had placed it to begin with.

---

 

That's a good point. I guess there's really no way of being 'certain', unless you hid (or saw) the container there yourself.

 

quote:

---

The smiley face here provides positive information; i.e. "the cache is here and OK." This information directly conflicts with the actual state of the cache, and thus should not be used. It is actually actively misleading others

---

 

Another good point. I hadn't thought of that.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jamie Z:

I think what makes me think this should be a not-found is that you weren't able to sign the logbook.

---

 

This sounds like a good rule of thumb. If I run into any similar situations myself, that's what I'll use as my criteria of 'found' vs. 'not found'. (Luckily, I haven't encountered any plundered or missing caches so far. Hopefully...knock on wood...I never will.)

[+T-storm]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markj: I've got a digital camera... Perhaps I'll take it with me on all cache hunts from now on and if I run into this problem again, I'll post a picture of where the cache should have been (or at least where I think it should have been). If the cache owner agrees based on the picture that I found the location but that the cache has been stolen/plundered, then I think that should qualify as a Found.

 

What do y'all think about that??

---

I found a cache location just as you described. The coords and GPS led me repeatedly to this spot. Searched the woods around the area for 1.5 hours. Nothing. Decrypted hints. Two separate hints perfectly matched the location I'd already been via GPS. No cache. The container was described, so it didn't seem to be a problem of a clever container confusing me. Took several pics of the site. I logged a Not Found and e-mailed the cache owner through the GC.com e-mail form describing the attempt and offering to send the photos if he would provide an e-mail address (no attachment function in the e-mail form). After 3-4 weeks of zero response and no change to the website, I contacted Jeremy and the cache was archived. Several months later the cache listing has never been repaired. So yes, it could be a useful tool, if folks would use it.

 

Now, as to what to do with my log if the cache owner says, "Yep, that's where it was and it's definitely gone, doggone-it." Absolutely nothing. I would leave it as a no-find because I did not locate a cache or sign a logbook. The second hunt I ever did I found all the clues mentioned, one of the recent trade items, and leavings of two others. No cache box or log. Logged it a no-find and e-mailed the owner. It was replaced a few weeks later and we promptly found it. Left both logs for the history of the cache.

 

Even posting a note that says you're posting a find only due to your pictures of the former cache location as confirmed by the owner still leaves a false impression of cache health. The smiley face is still there and those seeking to avoid unnecessary spoilers won't be reading the text. A personal acknowledgement that the cache is kaput between you and the owner is no guarantee that it will be appropriately marked as unavailable or archived or repaired in a timely manner.

 

So there's my $0.02.

 

T-storm

 

http://www.cordianet.com/geocaching

[+Jamie Z]

T-Storm,

 

I agree.

 

Jamie

[+markj]

Good points, all. Given the discussion, I'm persuaded that my experience at Carto-Cache was a "Not Found", and have edited the log as such.

 

Do hope we don't have to deal with this kind of crap (stolen/plundered caches) very often, though. I know that's naive, but for cryin' out loud, why can't folks just leave other folks' stuff alone??

[+Alan2]

Scheesh. Go have a beer and cool out. Doesn't seem like it's worth all this aggravation.

Alan

[+Alan2]

Scheesh. Go have a beer and cool out. Doesn't seem like it's worth all this aggravation.

Alan

[+Peanuthead]

test

[cachebaby]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markj:

Cachebaby gives me a great idea, though... [/quote}

MOI? *blush*

 

I've got a digital camera... Perhaps I'll take it with me on all cache hunts from now on and if I run into this problem again, I'll post a picture of where the cache should have been (or at least where I think it should have been).

---

 

Well... my post was about a "webcam cache" but... your interpretation gave me a good idea... I will take my digi-cam along on hunts and photo the cache contents (did that today).

 

CB

ps. MJ, you registered on my birthday

 

------------------------

I'm new here, be gentle.

[cachebaby]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markj:

Cachebaby gives me a great idea, though... [/quote}

MOI? *blush*

 

I've got a digital camera... Perhaps I'll take it with me on all cache hunts from now on and if I run into this problem again, I'll post a picture of where the cache should have been (or at least where I think it should have been).

---

 

Well... my post was about a "webcam cache" but... your interpretation gave me a good idea... I will take my digi-cam along on hunts and photo the cache contents (did that today).

 

CB

ps. MJ, you registered on my birthday

 

------------------------

I'm new here, be gentle.

[King Pellinore]

Find: the proof is in the logbook.

NoFind and Note are harder to determine which should be used for what

 

King Pellinore

[+Jamie Z]

KP,

 

My definition of when to log a no-find vs. logging a note is this: If I haven't yet logged the cache as a "find" and I make an attempt to find it (however feeble the attempt may be) the cache page will get a subsequent find or no-find, depending on my success.

 

I use notes to log info on caches I've already found or to log info on caches I haven't yet searched for.

 

Jamie

[+markj]

quote:

---

 

ps. MJ, you registered on my birthday

 

---

 

...and gee whiz, almost a year and a half have gone by without me wishing you a Happy One!!

[+markj]

quote:

---

 

ps. MJ, you registered on my birthday

 

---

 

...and gee whiz, almost a year and a half have gone by without me wishing you a Happy One!!

[BigDoggie]

sbell111, MYOB.

 

=================================

Interested in Geocaching in the state of Georgia? Visit the Georgia Geocachers Association at http://www.ggaonline.org